Amendment_No._2_-_Q As_-_RPF_SOL-620-13-000002.pdf

Amendment Number 2 Request For Proposal (RFP) Number: SOL-620-13-000002

Strengthening Advocacy and Civic Engagement Program

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Would USAID kindly provide offerors with a plug figure for the grants fund inclusive of all anticipated Grants under Contract activity?

Answer: Offerors are encouraged to propose grants budget based on their technical approach.

2. In the absence of a US-Nigeria bilateral agreement, should offerors budget for VAT payments?

Answer: Offerors should budget for all costs that they consider to be allowable, allocable, and reasonable.

3. Would USAID please provide an exchange rate assumption for budgeting purposes so that all offerors use the same rate?

Answer: Offerors should use own sources of information for budgeting.

4. Will offerors be expected to budget and account for the anticipated contribution of

$2.5 million from PIND separately from the rest of the project’s funding?

Answer: Contribution from PIND is included in the total estimated amount of $20 million for this activity.

5. Can USAID provide offerors with the project documents from the ADVANCE project, including but not limited to the referenced May 2009 mid-term evaluation, quarterly, and annual reports?

Answer: A copy of the 2009 ADVANCE project evaluation report is provided with this RFP amendment.

6. Would USAID be willing to provide additional information regarding LEAD's most recent activities?

Answer: A copy of LEAD’s third year workplan is provided with this RFP amendment.

7. When is the project end date for Media Support for Strengthening Advocacy, Good Governance and Empowerment (MESSAGE)?

Answer: The project end date for Media Support for Strengthening Advocacy, Good Governance and Empowerment (MESSAGE) is December 28, 2012.

RFP SECTION B

8. Section B.2 of the RFP defines the contract type as Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), and

Section F.4 identifies the deliverables, reports and outputs expected by the end of the performance period. Could USAID kindly confirm that the award will in fact be made under a CPFF-Completion type contract?

Answer: The resulting award will be a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Completion-type contract.

9. On page 10, USAID defines major subcontractors as subcontractors whose proposed costs exceed 20% of the Offeror’s proposed total cost or perform a key element of the scope of work, and on page 103 describes major subcontractors only as subcontractors whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed budget. Would USAID confirm that the definition of major subcontractors is a subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the total proposed budget?

Answer: The definition of major subcontractors are subcontractors whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the total proposed budget.

RFP SECTION C

10. Please clarify whether the CSO coalitions and networks receiving technical assistance under component 1 are the same CSO coalitions and networks selected for subgranting under component 2.

Answer: CSO coalitions and networks receiving technical assistance under component 1 are the same CSO coalitions and networks selected for subgranting under component 2.

11. Reference SOL Section C.4c1 (CLIN 001), Page 16, second full paragraph states “Given the above challenges, the component will provide targeted capacity support to selected CSO coalitions and networks. The project will remain open to working with less formally structured networks in ways to best meet project results. Bidders are strongly discouraged to require local partners to sign exclusivity agreements.” [emphases added]. It appears as if the phrase “local partners” relates to the “selected CSO coalitions and networks” referred to in the first sentence of this paragraph. Please confirm. If this is not the case, please clarify what “local partners” USAID is referring to.

Answer: The phrase “local partners” refers to the “selected CSO coalitions and networks.”

12. Sol. Sec C.4.(c).(1), para 3 p. 16: Does USAID's discouragement of exclusive local partnerships pertain to civil society networks and coalitions only as implied by the context of that paragraph? Or, does it apply to all types of local partners including for profit private firms, stand-alone CSOs, NGOs, research institutions, universities, etc.?

Answer: USAID’s discouragement of exclusivity agreements pertained to all local civil society networks and coalitions including local profit private firms, stand-alone CSOs, NGOs, research institutions, universities.

13. Reference SOL Section C.4c1 (CLIN 001), Page 16, third full paragraph states that “the capacity support needs will be identified through a participatory capacity assessment process which will be conducted by the contractor together with the local partner.” Please clarify what local partner USAID is referring to.

Answer: Local partner refers to the sub-awardee that will partner with the prime contractor to conduct the capacity assessment of selected partner CSO coalitions, and networks organizations to identify specific capacity support needs and to develop training plans to address those needs.

14. Reference SOL Section C.4c1 (CLIN 001), Page 16, last paragraph it states “This may include providing support to member organizations if necessary.” Does USAID intend that institutional support (core funding) will be given to individual member CSOs in addition to CSO coalitions and networks?

Answer: Institutional support (core funding) will only be given to selected partner

CSO coalitions and networks.

15. Page 16 says CSO coalitions and networks will receive core funding. Will the core funding be provided through sub-grants?

Answer: Yes, core funding will be provided through sub-grants.

16. Page 16 states "In addition to institutional support, small grants may also be available to support network/coalition activities." Are these small grants one and the same with sub-grants under Component 2?

Answer: Yes, small grants are one and the same as sub-grants as mentioned under

Component 2.

17. Reference SOL Section C.4c1i, Bullet Point 6, Page 17 (Illustrative Milestones). In this section, the RFP includes the following milestone: “Core group of Nigerian CSO coalitions or networks partners capable of receiving direct funding from USAID in the third year of the project.” Elsewhere the RFP indicates that direct funding will start in the fifth year, for example, in Section C.4c2, Paragraph 1, Page 19 (CLIN 002): “After four years, of the pool of six CSO partners, the most qualified three will transition to receiving awards directly from USAID for their advocacy and awareness activities instead of from the contractor” and in Section C.8b, Paragraph 1, Page 26 (Transition Strategy, Phase II):

“After four years … three of the most qualified [CSOs] will transition to receiving awards directly from USAID…” Would USAID please confirm that the selected CSOs are expected to receive direct funding from USAID in Year 5?

Answer: Selected CSOs are expected to receive direct funding from USAID in Year

5. Section C.4c1i, Bullet Point 6, Page 17 (Illustrative Milestones) is revised to read as follows: “Core group of Nigerian CSO coalitions or networks partners capable of receiving direct funding from USAID in the fifth year of the project.”

18. Reference SOL Section C.4c1ii (CLIN 001, Illustrative Targets), Page 17, indicator table. Next to the indicator “Number of organizations with demonstrated ability to receive a direct USAID grant or contract without special award conditions” the target is set at one CSO per year in years 2, 3 and 4. On page 19, first paragraph, it states, “After four years…the most qualified three will transition to receiving awards directly from USAID…” Would USAID please clarify if it wants one CSO ready to transition by the end of year 2, one CSO by the end of year 3 and a third CSO by the end of year 4, OR a total of three transitioned after the end of year 4?

Answer: A total of three CSO will transition to receiving awards directly from

USAID after the end of year 4. Section C.4c1ii (CLIN 001, Illustrative Targets), Page 17, indicator table is REVISED as follows:

Indicators

Illustrative Targets Year

Year

Year

Year

Year

LOP

USAID CSO Sustainability Index

10% 20% 20% 10% 10% 70%

Number of organizations with demonstrated ability to receive a direct USAID grant or contract without special award conditions

0 0 0 3 0 3

19. SOL Section C.4(c)(1), Pages 14-17 and SOL Section C.4(c)(2), Pages 17-20, Scope of

Work. The number of networks under CLIN 1 (SOL Section C.4(c)(1)) is not specified.

Under CLIN 2 (SOL Section C.4(c)(2)), page 18, the number of networks is specified as “no more than six.” Are the networks the same for CLINs 1 & 2? If they are different, please indicate an illustrative number of networks for CLIN 1.

Answer: Yes, the number of networks for both CLIN 1 & 2 are the same at “no more than six.”

20. SOL Section C.4(c)(1), Paragraph (ii), Page 17, Scope of Work/Illustrative Targets. Can you please clarify how the USAID CSO Sustainability Index and percentages are used as an indicator? What specifically is being measured?

Answer: The index is broken down to different capacity areas. There is an

Operational Plan indicator located on the USAID website :

http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/democracy_and_governance/technical_are as/civil_society/angosi/.

21. Reference SOL Section C.4c2 (CLIN 002), Page 18, first full paragraph at the bottom of the page states “Support will be provided to a select number of national and or regional level CSO coalitions or networks to broaden their constituencies and coordinate with a wide array of stakeholders…” Please clarify if the “select number of national and or regional coalitions or networks” in this sentence is the same set of coalitions and networks receiving technical assistance in Objective 1.

Answer: The “select number of national and or regional coalitions or networks” in this sentence is the same set of coalitions and networks receiving technical assistance in Objective 1.

22. Reference SOL Section C.4c2 (CLIN 002), Page 19, first paragraph states that “The contractor will continue to provide technical and capacity development support to CSO partners.” Please clarify if USAID means all six of the CSO partners, just the three that did not transition to receiving awards directly from USAID, or the three that did transition to direct awards from USAID.

Answer: The contractor will continue to provide technical and capacity development support to all of the six CSO partners.

23. Reference SOL Section C.4c2 (CLIN 002), Page 19, second paragraph states “Examples of potential themes and issues are included below.” Please clarify where those examples are. It does not appear as if they are below this section.

Answer: The sentence “Examples of potential themes and issues are included below.” is hereby DELETED in its entirety.

24. What is the estimated value of the Innovations and Spread the Word Fund (ISWF)?

Answer: There is no estimated value for the Spread the Word Fund (ISWF). Offerors should propose a reasonable estimated value consistent with their technical approach.

25. Reference SOL Section C.4c2ii (CLIN 002, Illustrative Targets), Page 20, indicator table. Year 5 Illustrative target is 20%. On page 26, second paragraph (Section C.8) it states that the “…some of the strongest of these organizations will then receive a direct award to implement the remaining year of objective 2…” Please clarify if the contractor will be held responsible for Objective 2, Year 5 illustrative targets if they are to be implemented by the Nigerian organizations. This would also change the LOP target as well.

Answer: The contractor will not be held responsible for Objective 2, Year 5 illustrative targets if they are to be implemented by the Nigerian organizations.

26. Section C.4(c)(2)(ii), Page 20, Scope of Work. We respectfully request that a copy of the

LCSI is provided to all offerors.

Answer: A copy of the LCSI can be accessed at the following website:

USAID/OTI Lebanon Program Annual Report: October 2010 ...

transition.usaid.gov/our_work/cross-cutting.../annrpt0911.pdf

27. Page 20, the Illustrative Target refers the LCSI Advocacy Index used by USAID/OTI in Lebanon. Would USAID please provide more information on this Index?

Answer: See response to question 26 above.

28. Reference SOL Section C.4c3ii (CLIN 003, Illustrative Targets), Page 21, indicator table. The LOP totals do not match the aggregate total of each year. Please clarify the illustrative annual targets and LOP targets for each indicator.

Answer: Section C.4c3ii (CLIN 003, Illustrative Targets), Page 21, indicator table is

REVISED as follows:

Indicators

Illustrative Targets Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 LOP

Number of civil society organizations (CSOs) receiving USG assistance engaged in advocacy interventions.

10 10 10 10 10 50

Number of USG-funded organizations representing marginalized constituencies trying to affect government policy or conducting government oversight.

2 3 5 10 10 30

As stated in Section C.5 of the RFP, the illustrative indicators are provided as examples of the types of indicators that may be used. Offerors are encouraged to propose other milestones and indicators necessary to adequately measure proposed project results, consistent with their technical approach.

29. Section C.4(c)(3)(ii), Page 21, Scope of Work. We respectfully request a clarification of the illustrative Targets. Is the “Number of USG-funded organizations representing marginalized constituencies trying to affect government policy or conducting government oversight” a subset of the total number of CSOs, or in addition to the number of CSOs receiving USG assistance engaged in advocacy interventions?

Answer: “Number of USG-funded organizations representing marginalized constituencies trying to affect government policy or conducting government oversight” is in addition to the number of CSOs receiving USG assistance engaged in advocacy interventions.

30. Reference SOL Section C.4c4iii (CLIN 004), Page 22. The section states “Placement of senior technical assistants…over an extended period of time (i.e. two to six months).”

Please clarify if this is a one-time placement or if this placement should occur in each year of the period of performance.

Answer: Placement of senior technical assistants directly with select BMOs is expected to occur in each year of the period of performance.

31. Reference SOL Section C.4c4 (CLIN 004), Page 23, last sentence of the first paragraph states “Priority will be given to BMOs and CSOs supported under PIND’s Economic Development programs in the Niger Delta…” Please provide a list of these BMOs and CSOs that are supported by PIND’s Economic Development program.

Answer: More information can be sourced from PIND website at:

www.pindfoundation.org

32. Reference SOL Section C.6d, Page 25 (Illustrative Common Indicators). In (d) of this section, the RFP includes the “LCSI Advocacy Index used by USAID/OTI” as standard indicators upon which the contractor must report under this program. Would USAID please provide a copy of the LCSI Advocacy Index?

Answer: see response to Question 26 above.

33. Could USAID please clarify which Delta states the offerors are expected to operate in?

Answer: The program can be implemented in any of the Niger Delta states consistent with offerors’ technical approach. In selecting target states, offerors are encouraged to consider exploring approaches outlined in Section C.7 of the RFP.

34. SOL Section C.7, Paragraph (b), Page 25, Geographic Scope. The RFP states, “Strengthening the enabling environment for LEAD’s entry into state in the Niger Delta (state not yet identified by LEAD) by beginning to develop the capacity of CSOs and CSO coalitions in those states.” We request the USAID provide an illustrative state for budgeting purposes.

Answer: USAID does not have a specific state identified at this time.

35. Reference SOL Section C.7, Pages 25 – 26 (Geographic Scope). Would USAID please clarify if the Offeror should propose specific target states for SACE in addition to the states of the Niger Delta, Bauchi, and Sokoto?

Answer: Offerors should propose target states consistent with their technical

36. Would USAID provide background or priorities for assistance envisioned through SACE in support of USAID/LEAD in Bauchi, Sokoto, and selected Delta states, referenced on page 25 as a top priority for USAID/Nigeria?

Answer: No, USAID will not provide priority assistance; however, offerors are encouraged or free to propose states with programs consistent with the technical

37. Reference SOL Section C.7, Page 25 (Geographic Scope). In the RFP, USAID has stressed the imperative of "complementing USAID programs, most notably the local governance program LEAD, in the states of Bauchi and Sokoto..." and "strengthening the enabling environment for LEAD's entry into the state in the Niger Delta..." Would USAID please provide a copy of the latest workplan for the LEAD program to enable the Offerors' ability to respond to USAID's instructions?

Answer: A copy of LEAD’s third year workplan is provided with this RFP amendment.

38. Under Section C.7. Geographic Scope, page 25, USAD states "in selecting target sates, the following approaches must be explored..." Is USAID requiring implementing partners to conduct a state selection process at the beginning of the program and/or propose target states in their proposal? If so, is there a minimum or maximum number of states required?

Answer: Offerors should propose target states consistent with their technical

39. In the transition from Phase I to Phase II of the program, does USAID intend to issue an

RFA or RFP to the three local organizations qualified to receive awards from USAID directly?

Answer: As stated in the RFP, criteria for selecting the organizations will be developed by USAID in conjunction with the contractor.

40. Please confirm that when USAID states on page 26 that "the project will not continue to phase II if pre-award assessment results of all CSO partner organizations reveal inability to manage USAID awards" that Component 1, 3 and 4 will have a 5 year period of performance regardless of the outcome of the pre-award assessment results.

Answer: Yes, components 1, 3 and 4 will have a 5 year period of performance regardless of the outcome of the pre-award assessment results.

41. Reference SOL Section C.12, Pages 28 – 29 (Staffing Plan), last sentence on page 28 states “The staffing pattern will reflect the minimum number of highly experienced staff sufficient to manage and implement the Strengthening Advocacy and Civic Engagement program activities under this award including women and youth managers.” [emphasis added]. Please clarify what USAID means by the “minimum number of highly experienced staff”. Is this intended to guide each Offeror to only propose the minimum staffing requirements it would take to implement the program?

Answer: Yes, this sentence is intended to only guide offerors to propose minimum but highly experienced staff required to effectively implement the proposed program.

42. Should an offeror propose a Nigerian chief of party, would USAID consider allowing an expatriate deputy chief of party?

Answer: As stated in Section C.12 of the RFP, offerors shall propose staffing composition that is deemed appropriate and consistent with their technical

43. Would USAID accept significant experience in financial and administrative compliance as an acceptable substitute for the requirement of ACA/ACCA/CPA for the Finance and Administration Manager on page 31?

Answer: No, in addition to significant experience it is requested that the Finance and Administration Manager have an ACA/ACCA/CPA.

RFP SECTION F

44. SOL Section F.2, Paragraph (a), Page 34, Period of Performance. We request an anticipated start date for budgeting purposes.

Answer: The award will be for five years from the date of award.

RFP SECTION H

45. SOL Section H.4, Paragraph (f), Page 49, Additional Requirement for Personnel

Compensation. The RFP states that “Contractor shall compensate non-US personnel in accordance with its salary scale, staffing plan and compensation package.” But The RFP also includes, and makes reference to, the 2010 local employee scale for Nigeria. Is it permissible to compensate CCNs at a higher level than the local employee scale if it is in accordance with our internal compensation policies and based upon current local market research?

Answer: Direct salary and wages should be proposed in accordance with the offeror’s personnel policies and meet regulatory requirements. In order to compensate CCNs at a higher level than the USAID/Nigeria local employee compensation plan (LECP), offerors shall provide proper justification as stipulated in AIDAR 722.170 “Employment of third country nationals (TCNs) and cooperating country nationals (CCNs)” for Mission Director approval.

46. Per Section H.4(f), page 49, USAID is requesting Offerors to “submit a salary scale which reflects its proposed staffing plan covering all planned non-US (CCN/TCN) positions together with Contractor’s compensation policies.” Since TCNs will be authorized packages similar to US Nationals consistent with Contractor approved policies and procedures can, USAID please confirm that only one salary scale for CCNs is required?

Answer: Yes, only one salary scale covering all planned non-US (CCN/TCN) positions is required. TCN positions that are proposed to receive salaries and benefits similar to US Nationals, consistent with Contractor approved policies and procedures, should be excluded from the salary scale.

47. Page 49 H.4 (f) - States that contractors are to submit a Compensation Plan that covers all proposed initial salaries and salary ranges for all positions. May we submit a copy of our company’s personnel policy in response to this requirement? In the past, it was allowable for our personnel policy to be customized after award for the subject solicitation and place of performance.

Answer: A copy of the offeror’s personnel policy is required in addition to the compensation plan that covers all proposed initial salaries and salary ranges for all positions.

48. It is our corporate policy and practice to treat TCNs as U.S. citizens with respect to eligibility for allowances and currency of salary payment. Per Section H.4(f), page 49, USAID states that “TCNs will be authorized packages similar to US National consistent with Contractor approved policies and procedures.” Can USAID please confirm that this constitutes advance approval from the mission director, effective upon contract execution, to extend such allowances to all short- and long-term TCNs on the project, and to pay them in other than local currency per AIDAR 722.170.

Answer: No, this does not constitute advance approval. The Mission Director approvals will be processed after the award.

49. Page 50 of the RFP states that "A six-day work week is not authorized." Would USAID confirm that six-day work weeks are not authorized for long-term project employees, but are authorized for short-term technical assistance?

Answer: A six day work week is not authorized for short-term technical assistance.

50. Section H.9, Language Requirements, page 51, asks for English and “foreign” language proficiency. Could USAID specify what languages other than English they are looking for?

Answer: Offerors are encouraged to propose other languages consistent with the technical approach or geographic focus.

51. Section H.7, page 51, and Section L.10 (b)(7) Procurement Plan, page 112, references

Geographic Code 937. Would USAID consider allowing a waiver on Geographic Code 937 so that the offeror can utilize technical skills from third countries in order to contribute to program activities?

Answer: The authorized geographic code for the award is 937.

52. In Section H.12 Grants Under Contract, paragraph 1, page 53, states: “The grant funds shall be used solely for the grants including FOGs and does not include any administrative costs.” Can USAID confirm whether or not it is allowing offerors to charge a fee on grants?

Answer: Any administrative costs for managing grants should be budgeted separate from this fund.

53. Due to implementation challenges in previous Nigeria programs. Would USAID consider removing Section H.23, Confidentiality and Ownership of Intellectual Property, page 59?

Answer: A determination on whether to include or remove section H.23 will be made at award based on successful offeror’s documented justification.

RFP SECTION L

54. Reference SOL Section L.7b, Paragraph 1, Page 96 (Electronic Submission). Would

USAID please confirm that the electronic submission of the proposal should be: (a) In unprotected Excel spreadsheets for the budget, and (b) In either Adobe Acrobat PDF or MS Word for the technical, budget narrative, etc.?

Answer: Electronic submission should be: (a) in “unprotected” excel spreadsheets

(software versions 2003 or newer) for the budget to allow USAID to view all formulas and calculations; and (b) In either Adobe Acrobat PDF or MS Word (software versions 2003 or newer) for the technical proposal, budget narrative, and all other required documents that form part of the proposal. Pages containing signatures should be submitted in Adobe acrobat PDF format.

55. Section L.7 (b), page 96, states that offerors must submit proposals in MS Word and PDF format. Would USAID consider allowing offerors to submit only the technical approach in MS Word and PDF format, and all other sections in PDF format only?

Answer: Electronic copies of the technical proposal shall be submitted in either MS

Word or Adobe Acrobat PDF (software versions 2003 or newer). Pages containing signatures should be submitted in Adobe acrobat PDF format.

56. Reference SOL Section L.8, Pages 98 – 104 (Instructions for the Preparation of the

Technical Proposal). Would USAID please confirm that the following items are not included in the 40-page limit? Cover, Cover letter, Tabs/dividers, Acronym list.

Answer: Cover, Cover letter, Tabs/dividers, and Acronym list do not count against the 40-page limitation.

57. SOL Section L.8, Page 98, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal.

Please confirm that the TOC and acronyms list are excluded from the page count limitations.

Answer: See response to question 56 above.

58. Reference SOL Section L.8, Pages 98 – 104 (Instructions for the Preparation of the

Technical Proposal). Would USAID please confirm that the following information should be submitted in the annexes to the technical?

• Key Personnel CVs, references, and individual LOCs

• Table summarizing qualifications for proposed personnel

• Management Structure Organizational Chart

• First Year Workplan

• Past Performance Reports

• SF242

• Capacity building manuals and tools (or links)

• Performance Management Plan

• Branding Implementation and Marking Plans

Answer: Offerors will determine the type of information to be submitted as annexes to their technical proposal in response to the instructions provided in the RFP. The list provided on page 98 of the RFP is illustrative.

59. Section L.7 (h), page 97, the RFP states that text boxes must also use 12-point font.

Would USAID consider allowing the offerors to use 8 or 10-point font in text boxes to improve readability?

Answer: A font smaller, larger or otherwise different than that used in the main body of the text, as long as it is reasonably legible, may be used in text boxes. The stated text body size remains unchanged in accordance with section L.7(h) of this RFP.

60. Would USAID confirm that graphics are not included in the technical proposal page limitation?

Answer: Any page in the Technical Proposal that contains graphics is included in the technical proposal 40-page limitation.

61. In Section L.8(c)(1), please clarify the sentence that reads: "Each resume shall be accompanied by a signed letter of commitment from each candidate indicating his/her: (a) availability to serve in the stated position, in terms of months; after award; and (b) intention to serve for a stated term of service." Would USAID confirm that the requested letter of commitment should include a commitment to mobilize to post within a specified period of time in terms of months, and then their intention to serve at post for a period of time specified by the offeror?

Answer: The letter of commitment should include a commitment to mobilize to post within a specified period of time, and indicate availability to serve in the proposed position for the required period at the designated location.

62. SOL Section L.8, Page 98, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal.

Please confirm which annexes will be evaluated as a part of the Basis of Award, SOL Section M.2(d)(1), page 118.

Answer: All critical information from annexes identified and summarized in the technical proposal will be evaluated as part of the basis of award.

63. Reference SOL Section L.8b2, Page 99 (Performance Monitoring Plan), the RFP states that “the Offeror shall include in their proposal a Performance Management Plan (PMP) and explain how it will establish baseline data and set targets for indicators.” However, on Page 24 (c5. Milestones), the RFP states that “The Contractor shall propose milestones, results and targets that support its technical approach.” Would USAID confirm that the Offeror is expected to explain its approach to setting targets and to not include specific targets in the proposal’s PMP?

Answer: The offeror is expected to explain its approach to setting targets and not to include specific targets in the proposal’s PMP.

64. Reference SOL Section L.8c2 & 3, Paragraphs 2 & 3, Pages 100-101 (Staffing Plan/Key Personnel) / Section M.3b4, Paragraph Page 120 (Staffing Plan/Key Personnel) & Section L.8d2iii, Paragraph 3, Page 101 (Institutional Capability and Management Plan). The RFP asks for descriptions of proposed positions/roles and responsibilities and an explanation of how STTA will be used in both the Staffing Plan/Key Personnel & Institutional Capability and Management Plan. Please clarify as it appears as if this information is evaluated in two separate places. If no, could USAID please clarify the difference? If so, please clarify in which evaluation criteria this information will be only evaluated.

Answer: Section L.8(d)(2) iii, Paragraph 3, on Page 101 (Institutional Capability and Management Plan) is hereby DELETED in its entirety.

65. The Staffing Plan presently requires CCN/TCN salaries to be included. As the Staffing

Plan is part of the Technical Proposal and must be kept separate from the Cost Proposal.

Please confirm that CCN/TCN salaries should not be included in the Staffing Plan/Technical Proposal.

Answer: CCN/TCN salaries should not be included in the Staffing Plan/Technical

Proposal.

66. Please confirm that Offeror’s SF-294s should be included with the Subcontracting Plan in the Cost Proposal.

Answer: SF-294s should be included in the technical proposal in response to Section L.8(f) of the RFP.

67. SOL Section L.10, Paragraph (b)(3), Page 107, Instructions for the Preparation of the

Cost/Business Proposal The RFP states that “Detailed budgets, as demonstrated in section

B.3, B.4, and L.10(b)(6), are only required for the offeror and major subcontractors, as defined in section B.6 of the RFP.” Previously, however, on p. 106, the RFP states that “A budget format to be used by Offerors and their subcontractors is provided below.” This latter statement does not specify whether it applies to all subcontractors or just major ones.

(a) Are we required to submit budgets and budget narratives for non-major subcontractors? (b) If partner budgets are required, should they be CLIN-based? (c) Even if not required, are we permitted to submit budgets and budget narratives for non-major subcontractors?

Answer: (a) Detailed budgets, as demonstrated in section B.3, B.4, and L.10(b)(6), are only required for the offeror and major subcontractors, as defined on page 10, section B.6 in the RFP. (b) Budgets for major subcontractors should be in the same format as the prime contractor, following instructions contained in Section L.10(b)(3). (c) Offerors may submit budgets and budget notes for non-major subcontractors if they deem it necessary to support proposed costs. However, this is not a requirement.

68. If USAID prefers not to assign weights to by CLIN, would a consolidated budget without breakdown by CLIN be acceptable?

Answer: In accordance with instructions contained in Section L.10(b)(3), Offerors are required to submit a consolidated budget broken down by CLINS consistent with the format provided in the RFP.

69. Will USAID provide an Excel version of the budget template?

Answer: Offerrors should use their own excel templates following the format provided in L.10(b)(6).

70. SOL Section L.10, Paragraph (b)(6), Page 108, Instructions for the Preparation of the

Cost/Business Proposal The budget summary table includes a subheading under “Travel, Transportation, and Per Diem” listed as “Entitlement Travel.” We request clarification of what is considered to be “Entitlement Travel” for this RFP.

Answer: Entitlement Travel is applicable based on organizational policy and regulations, if offerors are planning to hire expatriate staff. Costs could include assignment, repatriation, R&R, Home Leave,

71. In consideration of the requested cost proposal by CLIN described on page 108, would

USAID assign relative weighting of costs to inform resource allocation in Offeror’s cost proposals? If USAID prefers not to assign weights, would USAID consider accepting a simplified budget format that permits greater flexibility in implementation?

Answer: USAID has not assigned relative weighting of costs to inform resource allocation by CLIN. All budget formats should be consistent with instructions contained in the RFP.

72. Reference SOL Section L.10b7, Paragraph 2, Page 109 (Salary and Wages). The RFP states that “The Offeror must separate expatriate and cooperating country national labor categories for short/long-term and administrative staff.” Would USAID clarify that the Offeror is to separate expatriate and CCN labor categories, but not management/programmatic staff from administrative staff?

Answer: Offerors are required to provide a breakdown of direct labor categories as indicated in the format provided in the RFP.

73. SOL Section L.10, Paragraph (b)(8)(i), Page 112, Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost/Business Proposal The RFP states that “The Offeror must submit completed Contractor Employee Biographical Data Sheet (see Attachment J 1) for each long-term individual (other than clerical/secretarial) proposed whose salary will be charged as a direct cost to the contract.” Further down in the same paragraph, the RFP makes further reference to the biographical data sheet and states that “Consulting fees must clearly specify the number of days for each consultancy. If the individual is on an appointment of less than 12 months (e.g., an academic year appointment for a university faculty member), the form must indicate the number of months in the appointment period.” This latter statement suggests that biographical data sheets are required for long term AND short term staff. Please clarify whether we are required to submit in the proposal biographical datasheets for ALL staff, including short term consultants or just for long-term staff.

Answer: Biodata forms are required for both long-term and short-term staff.

74. Sol Sec L.10 Para 8 (iii) Page 112 – Kindly confirm that letters of commitment are required from all long term staff/personnel including non-key personnel.

Answer: Letters of commitment are required from all long term staff/personnel including non-key personnel.

75. Is the required Procurement Plan meant to be illustrative? If so, please confirm that USAID will require a standard procurement process after award and that the Procurement Plan submitted in the proposal is not binding?

Answer: The procurement plan should provide explicit information on how procurements will be accomplished. Detailed information will include a comprehensive list of supplies and equipment to be purchased, type of equipment, manufacturer, estimated unit cost, the number of units to be purchased, and the expected geographic source. This information should support the equipment and supplies budget line in the cost proposal.

76. The procurement source of certain equipment is not yet confirmed. Will a detailed procurement plan as described in section L.10 still be needed in these instances?

Answer: A procurement plan is still needed to provide a detailed breakdown including estimated cost supplies and equipment required for implementation of the project.

RFP - SECTION M

77. As there is no point allocation provided in the evaluation criteria, can USAID kindly describe the how much weight (i.e., points) will be given to each section of the proposal?

Answer: As stated in the RFP, page 121 section M.3(e), adjectival rating shall be used to evaluate elements listed in all proposals received.

78. Reference SOL Section M.3div, Paragraph 5, Page 121 (CSO Capacity Building

Experience). In this section, the RFP states that “Proposals should describe the methods they intend to use to build the technical and/or organizational capacity of those organizations according to best practices.” Please clarify that USAID seeks to obtain methods of our technical approach in the CSO Capacity Building Experience section. If not, would USAID confirm that it is sufficient to describe these methods in the Technical Approach section?

Answer: Offerors’ methods/approaches to build the technical and/or organizational capacity of CSOs according to best practices should be discussed in this section.

RFP SECTION - ANNEX

79. SOL Annex J2, Page 127, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Form. Are we required to submit the Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Form with the proposal? If so, should it be included in the cost or technical volume?

Answer: The Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Form should be included in the cost proposal.